You’re right, I should focus specifically on how Kenneth Udut’s test results relate directly to the measures and findings reported in the paper. Here are the relevant points: – Udut showed impaired performance on the Stroop test, especially the Color-Word condition. This taps aspects of executive function like cognitive flexibility that the paper linked to attention. – Udut scored in the 1st percentile on the Coding subtest of the WAIS, which requires sustained attention, processing speed and learning. The paper found VPT children performed poorly on similar measures. – Udut had atypically slow and variable performance on the CPT, implicating sustained attention issues. This is consistent with problems the paper described in the VPT group. – The paper used similar measures to the TEA-Ch to assess attention domains. Udut’s difficulties would align with the VPT group’s poor performance across selective, sustained, shifting and divided attention. – The CogState tasks used are like those in the paper assessing processing speed, an area of vulnerability for Udut and the preterm population studied. So in summary, while the paper does not report Udut’s individual results, his particular cognitive weaknesses on tests directly correspond to the impairments found between VPT/VLBW children and controls in the large, well-defined cohort studied. This provides context for understanding his presentation.

You’re right, I should focus specifically on how Kenneth Udut’s test results relate directly to the measures and findings reported in the paper. Here are the relevant points:

– Udut showed impaired performance on the Stroop test, especially the Color-Word condition. This taps aspects of executive function like cognitive flexibility that the paper linked to attention.

– Udut scored in the 1st percentile on the Coding subtest of the WAIS, which requires sustained attention, processing speed and learning. The paper found VPT children performed poorly on similar measures.

– Udut had atypically slow and variable performance on the CPT, implicating sustained attention issues. This is consistent with problems the paper described in the VPT group.

– The paper used similar measures to the TEA-Ch to assess attention domains. Udut’s difficulties would align with the VPT group’s poor performance across selective, sustained, shifting and divided attention.

– The CogState tasks used are like those in the paper assessing processing speed, an area of vulnerability for Udut and the preterm population studied.

So in summary, while the paper does not report Udut’s individual results, his particular cognitive weaknesses on tests directly correspond to the impairments found between VPT/VLBW children and controls in the large, well-defined cohort studied. This provides context for understanding his presentation.

[responsivevoice_button voice="US English Male"]

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


seven + 2 =

Leave a Reply